Clearly, a calm follow-up with Mr. Webb is needed by somebody on the NetBSD board,
but it should not go officially unanswered, IMHO.

Perhaps a full-blown article on /. coincident with the 2.0 release, with _our_
comparisons to our sister projects...

-Mike



On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Herb Peyerl wrote:

> On 19-Oct-04, at 3:21 PM, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
>
> > The person obviously never looked at NetBSD in detail, nor has any
> > deep understanding of concepts like performance and security, else it
> > would be obvious that they are not something that NetBSD has to brag
> > about, but rather something that's considered normal.
> >
> > Of course if you have nothing else to sell you can say "we're oh so
> > secure" or "hey, we have all the cool GUI stuff, we can afford the
> > bloat" - NetBSD won't, given it's constraints given through the
> > portability. NetBSD has to offer state of the art operating system
> > that OF COURSE is secure, and OF COURSE is performance optimized, and
> > OF COURSE has about all the drivers available. But there's more to
> > that other than the things that every operating system offers OF
> > COURSE these days.
> >
> > Blindly ignoring the facts and judging by some marketing slogan and
> > hear-say proves that the author has no technical background for his
> > writing at all, and obviously doesn't know any code of ethics for
> > writing.
>
> Some people feel the need to "publish" _something_.  Getting published
> on slashdog must be the crowning glory in their lives...
>
> /. has never really been a paragon of quality or even timely 'news';
> but nowadays, it's not even worth the browser rendering cycles; when
> this sort of crap gets published...